CAPITOL HILL: Chronic maintenance problems with the aging F-18 Hornet are hobbling the Marines, leaving them with less than 60 percent of the strike fighters they need to conduct training and operations, the deputy commandant for aviation told the Senate this afternoon.
“I pulled up our readiness data just yesterday,” Lt. Gen. Jon Davis told the seapower subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee. “We have 87 aircraft that were mission capable. Out of those 87 airplanes, I put 30 airplanes in the training squadron and 40 airplanes deployed forward. There’s not a lot left for the [remaining] units to train with.”
![]()
Lt. Gen. Jon Davis
How many Hornets should the Marine Corps have ready to go? Under the current, shrunken force structure, 150: a training squadron of 30 and 12 combat squadrons of 10 aircraft each. Until 18 months ago, that figure was 174 — 30 training aircraft and 12 squadrons of 12 aircraft each — but the Marines decided to shrink each squadron to reflect the reality of insufficient aircraft.
This is the Marines own damn fault.
They made the decision back in the late 1990s to not buy any E/F model SuperHornets, and gamble that they could keep the legacy Hornet fleet flying until the JSF (now F-35B) came online.
Well, not surprisingly, the most complex airplane in the world is over budget and behind schedule.
The Navy was practically begging the Marines to buy SuperHornets, to drive down the unit costs, but the Marine fear was that doing so would push the F-35B purchase even further to the out years, and they would be facing an end of life crisis with the AV-8B fleet. Which, they're pretty much facing anyway.
I get the doctrinal and operational reasons why the Marines felt so compelled to bet the future of the Marine Corps as a service on the MV-22B, the F-35B, and the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle. But it also looks like they might have lost the bet.
Leave a comment